alexio
G.O.A.T.
djoko of 15 vs nadal 08 at wimby who wins?
OE top 6 at Wimbledon if we only look at prime level
- Thread starter StefanV
- Start date
Hood_Man
G.O.A.T.
If Rafa wasn't trying to win his first Wimbledon title he probably would have won in straight sets in 2008, and that was against a Federer who, despite being hindered by physical issues that year, was still only 26.
Nadal in 3.
RS
Bionic Poster
6-4 Nadal maybe if a bit lucky 7-3.
RS
Bionic Poster
Guess you could just take it as in 5 hard sets.
RS
Bionic Poster
What does it tell us?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Funny that when I argue against hypotheticals the pushback I get is that that the only point is to compare who played better against their competitions (and therefore can base the judgments on actual match play) and not who would win in time travel tennis. Yet all these discussions end in some version of a “Player A would beat Player B” discussion, very explicitly claiming that it’s not about relative results, it’s about who would win a 1to1 matchup
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
I have seen it and obviously the Court 1 + big server is a different matchup than a potential Murray match. But Djoko was also clearly shaken by a player operating on that level (similar to how he was shaken by Wawrinka’s game in RG that year) which shows that all may not have been well with him against the highest upper tier of competition.
Now, 2014/15 Murray is not that, but I’m saying is that Novak’s level is not some unimpeachable achievement that cannot be questioned which you seemed to imply it was.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Djokovic did not play passive tennis like the RG final. He was dealing with someone serving huge and not missing much off the ground. Plus, as you pointed out it was Court 1 so it was faster conditions than Centre.
I didn't say it was unimpeachable but you have to admit Djokovic would be the big favorite. Federer was Djokovic's biggest challenge on grass at his peak. From a sole analytical standpoint, Murray, as great as he is on grass with his all court, counterpunching style, does not have the same weapons that Federer does to hurt Djokovic at his best with. That's what it really boils down to.
Edit: I read that as you didn't watch it. Comment edited.
RS
Bionic Poster
Can't believe Venus is still playing.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
How often are you supposed to replicate it? Because if it was just "prime" and not looking at consistency at all Krajicek should be up there based on his '96 run alone (for me, at least).
But I would go something like this (considering some semblance of consistency at least):
1- Sampras
2- Federer
3- Djokovic/Borg
5- Mac
6-Becker/Nadal
Nadal gets overlooked because of having "only" two titles, but from 2006 to 2011 he was insanely consistent. Too bad he was a disaster show for so long after that until he remembered how to play in 2017/2018.
Aside from the fact that I don't think it's better or worse to lose to several players or the same one, there are tons of versions of Djokovic at Wimbledon that are superior to the 2016 one to say it was prime. That was the beginning of the slump. Since everyone these days loves to talk about "this was the 5th or 8th or 10th version of X player at Y slam", Djokovic was better at Wimbledon in 2007, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 and even weak versions like 2017, 2009 and 2010. Basically every year except 2008 lol.
But I would go something like this (considering some semblance of consistency at least):
1- Sampras
2- Federer
3- Djokovic/Borg
5- Mac
6-Becker/Nadal
Nadal gets overlooked because of having "only" two titles, but from 2006 to 2011 he was insanely consistent. Too bad he was a disaster show for so long after that until he remembered how to play in 2017/2018.
Aside from the fact that I don't think it's better or worse to lose to several players or the same one, there are tons of versions of Djokovic at Wimbledon that are superior to the 2016 one to say it was prime. That was the beginning of the slump. Since everyone these days loves to talk about "this was the 5th or 8th or 10th version of X player at Y slam", Djokovic was better at Wimbledon in 2007, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 and even weak versions like 2017, 2009 and 2010. Basically every year except 2008 lol.
jl809
Hall of Fame
Was Federer really his biggest challenge post 2012? Dominated from the baseline, lost 3/3 matches, looked slow. Murray at least would’ve been able to hold his own in rallies.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
Old Fed schooled him at SW19
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
Sorry to break it to you but Lewis was not just bigger but also far skilled boxer than Tyson, Lewis could win matches in many ways.
mental midget
Hall of Fame
fed
pete
borg/mac very close, borg's record is better but if we're talking peak level...dunno, coin flip, maybe mac even
becker
edberg deserves a mention. stich's run was also incredible tennis: beat courier, edberg, becker en route to winning.
and honestly agassi's win was impressive, on the 'fast grass' i believe.
i'm sure newcombe, laver, many older greats deserve mention as well.
pete
borg/mac very close, borg's record is better but if we're talking peak level...dunno, coin flip, maybe mac even
becker
edberg deserves a mention. stich's run was also incredible tennis: beat courier, edberg, becker en route to winning.
and honestly agassi's win was impressive, on the 'fast grass' i believe.
i'm sure newcombe, laver, many older greats deserve mention as well.
NatF
Bionic Poster
How disingenuous to boil down serves to nothing but speed
TheFifthSet
Legend
Federer/Sampras
McEnroe
Borg
Djokovic/Nadal/Becker
7, sue me. Krajicek was close to unplayable in the second week of ‘96 but feel uneasy about including someone without multiple high-level runs.
McEnroe
Borg
Djokovic/Nadal/Becker
7, sue me. Krajicek was close to unplayable in the second week of ‘96 but feel uneasy about including someone without multiple high-level runs.
Last edited:
RS
Bionic Poster
Says Venus is ranked 487 now.
Actually this was a couple months ago it is probably below 500 now.
Last edited:
Razer
Legend
Why didn't Lewis fight Tyson in his prime if he was so skilled and confident of winning? In his prime Mike used to knock out guys of Lewis's size, unless we believe Lewis is like Djokovic who gets better and better with age, there is no telling whether he can beat Tyson or not because he never had the guts to challenge Prime Mike Tyson.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
Same Tyson who was beating bums left right and centre in his early years?ffs. Got smoked by Douglas of all people and his resume is lacking big names. Tyson was younger than Lewis and it's not as if he became old in his late 20s lol when early 30s s are normaly around prime years for a boxer. As for fight not happening in between them is not down to only one boxer, Lewis was probably only boxer who wasn't scared of anyone. Overeating of Tyson is off the roof , nobody in his right mind will chose him as a winner against Lewis , dude got smoked by EL who was a glorified heavyweight lol. I am sorry but Tyson's resume lacks big names and that's why people don't put him anywhere close to Lewis.lewis is probably one of the best h2h boxer.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
RS
Bionic Poster
Not related to tennis.
NatF
Bionic Poster
For me I think PETE and Fedr are close, but probably the ridiculous level of serving PETE could bring in the final rounds gives him an edge - I think his prime period was just slightly better. Even if Federer in full flow on grass was perhaps a more majestic sight. After that Borg's five in a row has to put him in 3rd. The next group is Mac, Becker and Djokovic in some order. I think Mac's 1980-1984 mirrors Djokovic's 2011-2015 quite closely but was a bit more impressive, if you include 2018 as prime for Djokovic then he has an extra run but I still think the magnitude of Mac's wins put him slightly ahead. Becker I think underperformed at Wimbledon a fair bit, particuarly compared to his pre-prime and back to back wins then. So I would go...
1. PETE
2. Fedr
3. Borg
4. Mac
5. Djokovic
6. Becker
1. PETE
2. Fedr
3. Borg
4. Mac
5. Djokovic
6. Becker
StefanV
Rookie
Our lists are almost the same. Maybe you are right that Sampras should be ahead of Federer.
messiahrobins
Hall of Fame
I am certain he would have adapted well and better than McEnroe. Connors would have done well as well.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Either way is fine.
alexio
G.O.A.T.
open era
I'd be interested to see the rationale for those picking Becker over Edberg. They played in three straight finals from 1988-1990, with Edberg winning two of them. Then, in 1991, Edberg played a much better match against Stich in the SF than Becker did in the final. Going back to 1987, Becker was, of course, upset by Doohan in the second round while Edberg lost a tough five setter to Lendl in the SF.
So, is the thinking that Becker of 1985-1986 was better than Becker/Edberg from 1987-1991? Because, otherwise, Edberg was pretty clearly the better player at Wimbledon in 4/5 years from 1987-1991.
So, is the thinking that Becker of 1985-1986 was better than Becker/Edberg from 1987-1991? Because, otherwise, Edberg was pretty clearly the better player at Wimbledon in 4/5 years from 1987-1991.
Last edited:
NatF
Bionic Poster
Good point. Becker's legacy at Wimbledon is largely pre-prime. In traditional prime years Edberg was arguably better unless you give a lot of weight to all Becker's finals.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
What does “I am certain” mean in this context? How could you know something like this?
You could pick either one of them ahead of each other, they are much likely at the same level. Maybe it's because Becker somewhat gave the 1990 victory away to Edberg while he beat him straight in 1989 or maybe because he has lasted longer in Wimbledon over all with more titles and finals due to his power play. That's why I have a hard time ranking the likes of Federer, Djokovic and Nadal too aside from the change of tech and surface. Djokovic is just one title away from Federer but he has beaten him 3 times while Nadal isn't close to either one of them but he beat Federer at his prime. And Borg is another player who is hard to rank imo. He dominated Wimbledon but McEnroe pretty much dethroned him and beat him 3 times in 2 fast court Slams, not due to power and tech but due to style, skill and maybe due to his personality too. McEnroe gave serve and volley a new meaning in Wimbledon and players adapted to that style.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I was actually having some fun there but serve speed isn't a very important aspect? Then why do the top 5 servers of all time, according to the ATP site, also have some of the fastest serves ever recorded and some of the highest speed averages ever?How disingenuous to boil down serves to nothing but speed
NatF
Bionic Poster
I said "nothing but speed", I didn't say speed wasn't important. Yes you were having some fun, as I don't think you actually believe Venus' serve > Nadal's but you were still using it to make a serious point. Speed is one component, a very important one, but so is first serve%, the spin, the lefty factor etc...Obviously Djokovic doesn't struggle to return Nadal's slider out wide like Federer does but using serve speeds to put down Nadal's 2008 performance came off as a bit low lol.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Me saying Djokovic will be shaking in his boots at the slower serve speeds of Nadal compared to Venus Williams is me trolling and having fun, and making a point at the same time. I don't see how that puts down Nadal's entire 2008 final performance. However, 2015 Djokovic is almost definitely going to do better than 33% return points won on that serve. He did better than that on the 2015 Federer serve which is a clearly superior serve.
NatF
Bionic Poster
If you don't see how your post could come across that way to someone on the outside then I don't know what to tell you lol. Djokovic has never beaten a player as good as 2008 Nadal at Wimbledon. That doesn't mean he couldn't win, but it would be a tough fight.
RS
Bionic Poster
Boom.
RS
Bionic Poster
Yeah I gathered she doesn't play often. 2023 was a injury year too.Yea, she barely plays now and she's almost 44.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
It looks like it just came off that way to you. Apparently, neither has Federer.
At the end of the day, we know which matchup favors Nadal more though.
NatF
Bionic Poster
2007 NadalIt looks like it just came off that way to you. Apparently, neither has Federer.
No one has disputed the final comment as far as I know.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Ok man. Even 2007 Djokovic took the 1st set off him before blisters did him in. Federer has never handled Nadal at Wimbledon in any match as straightforward as Djokovic did in 2011. If you put the best version of Nadal against the best version of Djokovic at Wimbledon, I'd take Djokovic without any doubt.2007 Nadal
No one has disputed the final comment as far as I know.
2006 and 2019 would like a word.
